Well another review passed, and instead of feeling on track I’m left with more questions.
I went into the review thinking I had a pretty solid thesis statement and intent, and used this time to get feedback on building parti, design and user experience. Exactly what I thought the review was intended to be for. However, comments were barely made in regards to what I was portraying and instead went back to the original thesis idea.
That’s not to say the comments made weren’t valid, as they did bring up some good questions. The comment which resonated the most was making it fit into the context. Is there a more clear answer to what I’ve been answering all this time? It does seem like I have to run around several different things that might sum up to a reason why it is here.
The answer has always been an issue of land. Vertical farming is a proposed method in which less land would be used and even accomplish greater yields. Then its narrowed down to reusing old industrial sites which are abandoned to maintain the manufacturing and industrial character of the site. The issue is the nice giant beast of an old building that exists on my site and I’m reusing. But instead of just reusing this industrial context I’m adding on to it, significantly. The reviewers proposed the idea of just using the existing building and adding anything that may be necessary later.
This solution poses a lot of questions, but does provide a more clear answer to what my thesis is ultimately about.
1. It clearly transforms a set of existing industrial stock potentially in many cities, not just Milwaukee.
2. These old buildings are abandoned, underused, but hold a distinct historical and cultural aesthetic that is part of that city.
3. Little to no new land is being used.
4. There is ample square footage inside the building to house all the program. This would lead to a better use of space, as right now I have a lot of large left over spaces which are unclear in there use.
Some problems with this approach (it seems to me) but may be alleviated by further investigation on my part.
1. What is the architecture? I mean it’s essentially gutting an old building and reusing it. However there could be interesting ways to do this that would lead to exterior changes.
Final boards for this presentation:
Board 1
Board 2
Board 3
Perspective Vignettes:
Leave a Reply